Performative Ontology of Gender

The immensely feared socially constructed imaginary gender barrier is distinctly immaterial.

Gender science typically conceives of gender in primarily epistemological terms and so we need consider the genders of the body in ontological terms as well.

Ontological investigations into the question of gender typically takes its starting point in presumed but not actual anatomical dualities in the socially constructed genders of the body. This is so since humans constitute gendered spectrums both anatomically and behaviorally with intersexed people and transgender people in the middle as part of these two spectrums of differentiation in semiotic markers.

If however we take the respective middle parts of the spectrums as the starting points may we gain a very different ontological understanding of the genders of the body.

Transgender people experience a socially constructed asymmetry between body and genders and primarily so because transgender people suffer misgendering in society. When a transgender person points out having been misgendered ever since early age then what does s/he actually say in ontological terms? Does she refer to an embodied gendered essence or does s/he simply refer to coincidental social construction? Is a person transgender by destiny from birth and/or does a person become transgender by mere coincidence in social conditioning? When someone says “I am transgender”, does this has any meaning beyond identity politics and the performativity of gender?

It has been known in feminism at least since Simone de Beauvoir that gendered anatomy is socially constructed and Judith Butler as famous for describing the performativity of gender would no doubt concur.

Genders could be described as multiple layers as socially enveloping our bodies in that we all  have distinctly different genders for different social situations and different details of our socially constructed bodies:

Academic gender, Advertisement gender, Age gender, Alcoholic gender, Anal gender, Arm gender, Behavioral gender, Body breadth gender, Body hair gender, Body length gender, Brain gender, Breast gender, Bureaucratic gender, Buttocks gender, Ceremonial gender, Child gender, Chromosomal gender, Civic gender, Civilian gender, Class gender, Clerical gender, Clothes gender, Cohabitation gender, Communication gender, Consumer gender, Cosmetic gender, Criminal gender, Cultural gender, Dating gender, Decision-making gender, Drug abuse gender, Ear gender, Eating gender, Economic gender, Educational gender, Emotional gender, Entrepreneurial gender, Eschatological gender, Essentialist gender, Ethnic gender, Exercise gender, Eye gender, Facial form gender, Facial hair gender, Foot size gender, Friendship gender, Functional gender, Gaming gender, Generational gender, Genital gender, Hair gender, Hand size gender, Head form gender, Head hair gender, Health gender, Hearing gender, Household gender, Identity gender, Ideological gender, Infant gender, Initiation gender, Insight gender, Interactive gender, Internal organs gender, Interpersonal gender, Intuitive gender, Jewelry gender, Knowledge gender, Learning gender, Management gender, Marital gender, Marketing gender, Medical gender, Metaphysical gender, Military gender, Military uniform gender, Motivation gender, Mouth/lip gender, Muscle gender, Nail gender, Naturalized gender, Neurological gender, Nose gender, Occupational gender, Odor gender, Online gender, Parental gender, Participatory gender, Pedagogic gender, Perceptual gender, Performative gender, Personality gender, Photographic gender, Piercing gender, Plastic surgery gender, Political gender, Power gender, Procreative gender, Professional gender, Promotional gender, Prosthetic gender, Psychiatric gender, Psychoanalytic gender, Psychometric gender, Psychotherapeutic gender, Racial/Species gender, Rationality gender, Reasoning gender, Recruitment gender, Religious gender, Residential gender, Retired gender, Ritual gender, Role gender, School uniform gender, Scientific gender, Seductive gender, Self-concept gender, Self-control gender, Sex work gender, Sexuality gender, Shoes gender, Situational gender, Slavery gender, Spiritual gender, Sports gender, Stomach gender, Subconscious gender, Submission gender, Surgical gender, Temperamental gender, Temporal gender, Temporary gender, Thigh gender, Transportation gender, Vacation gender, Verbal gender, Virtual gender, Vision gender, Visionary gender, Visual gender, Voice gender, Waist gender, Work gender, Workplace gender; etc. in different cultures.

Gender of course is anything but binary and so being transgender is simply intense discomfort with coercively assigned binary gender. In using traditional cultural terminology could this thus be referred to as “Soul gender” as to be added to the above list. What traditional discourses described as “the soul” is simply the physical projection of personhood and so gender as expression of the “soul” is more expressive of personhood than any other such shibboleth such as age, color, ethnicity etc.

Gender thus is intrinsic expression of personhood and so the real question is therefore how one may appropriately express personhood by means of deploying the exterior to express the idiosyncratic interior. Gender hence is contrary to what is presumed not about the body but about the body expressing idiosyncratic personhood. Personhoods are extremely diverse as can indeed be measured across many psychometric spectra as certainly not limited to human Animals. But can gender be psychometrically measured? Its socially constructed expression can certainly become statistically quantified and there is certainly great individual gendered psychometric differentiation across the gendered spectrum but is this really a psychometric question or to put it differently what kind of question or rather riddle is gender actually? This is so as as individual gendered expressions are expressive of individual personhood to highly varying degrees. Gender expression may largely be a social mask yet it may also be profound expression, indeed projection of idiosyncratic personhood.

The real question hence is how successful individual gender expressions are in communicating/conveying individual personhood by means of social behaviors and the socially constructed appearance of the body. We need thus all be educated, trained and assisted in appropriately expressing individual personhood through bodily expression; including primping, body/facial language and movements of the tongue.

The standard Eurocentric body has been socially constructed as a dichotomous ideological hegemony where human bodies were hermeneutically ideologically interpreted in ways artificially bisecting this diverse human spectrum in anatomy. Need there be an imaginary standard human body for textbooks? If so should it be a racially/agewise/functionally indeterminable intersexed body as performatively irreducible to binary gender by observation alone.

The Eurolect – Politics of the Para-Christian documentation project

Screenshot 2017-12-01 at 23.30.32

The Intelligence Entrapment Methods documentation project.